Dart drivers

m_stan

Can someone please explain to me why the Dart drivers think they are entitled to a 25% pay-rise ? I mean, what extra work will they be doing when the trains get longer ? Surely they don't actually pull the carraiges themselves ?

This situation is ridiculous. As a private sector worker, I am sick and tired of the public sector holding the rest of us to randsom everytime they get a whiff of something that might help them extract more money out of the government. Ultimately we pay for it, and the services we pay for out of our taxes get held up while they sort it all out. The additional cost of these things comes right of of the tax payers pocket and I am sick of it.

If I went to my boss and said, I want a 25% pay-rise, I'd be laughed out of it. No matter what the circumstances. And in the case above, it's all for something that has no real impact on the job being done. It all seems to be just becuase they signed a contract that said the trains would never be any longer than 6 carraiges. SO FRIGGIN WHAT !!!

The labour court has said in no uncertain terms that they are not entitled to this money. Hopefully the management hold out on this one, even though that may cause more trouble. Just for the principle of it.

lazygit

i have to say i agree completley.. these guys can go to hell.. the service is total ****e when it actually runs. ill never forget the last time they were on strike and work was a 3hr bus ride from raheny to blackrock..

All the money that is pumped into this service and i have seen a 0% improvement in service in the 8 years that i have been using the service twice a day.

franman

They all ready get paided over €40,000 a year. Thats more than enough for them!!!!!

2Tagz

Surely it's the worst abuse of trade union power where a union is used to abuse the paymaster (in this case you and me, the private sector taxpayer) instead of actually protecting the employees themselves against genuine exploitation. As far as my experiences as a "customer" go I.E. is a pseudo-company run first and foremost for the benefit of it's employees (probably because of what goes on with the endlessly militant unions); the fact that anybody from the travelling public actually gets where they need to go on the trains is purely incidental to them..

rondjon

m_stan wrote:

Can someone please explain to me why the Dart drivers think they are entitled to a 25% pay-rise ? .

If I was doing a job that meant my company became more efficient by 33% in one fell swoop, and was therefore likely to increase revenue by that 33%, then I'd definitely want a cut of that extra revenue. Wouldn't you?

Or would you be happy to see your company become more successful in terms of revenue, and possibly profits, but not include you in the benefits that would therefore accrue?

I think not!!

m_stan wrote:

It all seems to be just becuase they signed a contract that said the trains would never be any longer than 6 carraiges. SO FRIGGIN WHAT !!! .

Are you saying that because a contract of employment was signed, but is no longer valid, that it should be totally ignored.

Get a grip man!! If you're employer came along and tried to change your work contract, you definitely wouldn't take it lying down, would you? If you did, you're a muppet!!!!

m_stan

No - I wouldn't hold my employer to randsom and no I'm not a muppet thanks very much.

I work for a public company. I get share options in the company I work for, so I share in the success of the company through my hard work. I also get bonuses tied directly to my personal performance.

Don't know what the deal is with CIE, but they have NO right to do what they are doing. It's a public service - not a profit making company. CIE does not become richer as a result of this change so why should it's employees ? If they don't like working for the country, then go work for the private sector without union representation - and rough it like the rest of us.

btw - are you happy to pay for this pay-rise through your taxes ? If you are, then I would look at who is calling who the muppet.

therecklessone

Firstly, what the hell has this to do with rip off Ireland? If IE put their prices up to pay for a pay increase then you have a point, until then take it to Commuting/Transport or Politics (to discuss the wider issue of union behaviour)

rondjon wrote:

If I was doing a job that meant my company became more efficient by 33% in one fell swoop, and was therefore likely to increase revenue by that 33%, then I'd definitely want a cut of that extra revenue. Wouldn't you?

I'd expect my union to examine the possibilities. They did. The Labour Court ruled against them. They're still threatening industrial action. Its debatable whether you can claim an increase in productivity due to employee actions here, its not as if their workload or responsibility has increased. Would they be entitled to an increase if IE bough longer carriages, with higher capacity? Does Dublin Bus have to pay an increase to its drivers if it buys a bus with an extra 10 seats?

It would make more sense for SIPTU and the NBRU to accept the new carraiges, and then use that as a bargaining chip in future pay negotiations, i.e. we've played ball in the past so its time for you (IE) to return the favour. Then if talks break down, they can go to the Labour Court and plead a much soundercase.

rondjon wrote:

Or would you be happy to see your company become more successful in terms of revenue, and possibly profits, but not include you in the benefits that would therefore accrue?

I think not!!

Considering the current state of public transport, and the threat posed by the introduction of private transport competitors, I'd say that this attempt at money grabbing will only harm the cause of DART drivers. And that helps them in the long run how?

rondjon wrote:

If you're employer came along and tried to change your work contract, you definitely wouldn't take it lying down, would you? If you did, you're a muppet!!!!

Bigger picture ron, bigger picture. Extortion now is not in the interests of union members. Like most public companies and their unionised staff though, the dollar signs are too tempting.

zAbbo

The argument being that the increased passengers, increases there workload, so they /would/ deserve the same increase in wages.

Would they also accept less wages, if the passengers was reduced?

They can go whistle as far as im concerned

therecklessone

bazH wrote:

The argument being that the increased passengers, increases there workload, so they /would/ deserve the same increase in wages.

Then its a seriously flawed arguement.

They don't greet the passengers one by one as they board. They don't have to deal with the passenegers at all. They get on board and press the go button (ok, grossly simplified...) 1 passeneger or 100, their job is the same.

Keano_sli

Apparently they had already agreed to the increase DART sizes in the last partnership agreement, so basically these guys want to be compensated twice, Privatise the DART and replace them all with Foreign drivers I say!

magpie

Apologies for cross-posting, I had this up in the politics forum then saw you were discussing it here, so here goes:

I was watching the news last night to see SIPTU claiming that DART drivers had the right to higher pay as they would be expected to carry 6+ cars of passengers, claiming higher responsibility and productivity.

They then had an Iarnrod Eireann representative who pointed out that under the PPF agreement DART drivers earn €48000 pa for a 40 hour 5 day week! Considerably more than many boards.ie users who have 3rd and even 4th level qualifications.

So it struck me, maybe Thatcher was right to break the Unions' stranglehold. The time when Unions stopped the working class from being exploited has passed, now they exploit their position to bully and extort unrealistically high salaries for low-qualification positions under the threat of destroying the country's infrastructure through strikes.

Given the vast quantity of highly-skilled workers available in Poland, Latvia and Lithuania who I'm sure would be delighted to drive DARTS, Busses etc for I suspect a fraction of what we have to pay our homegrown Unionised racketeers why can't we bring in foreign labour to do these jobs and break the unions for once and for all?

Irish society would benefit enormously from this sector of the workforce being thankful to have work, rather than demanding what are effectively professional salary levels for unskilled labour.

LegacyUser

more carriges doesn't nessaserly mean more passengers, just less cramped carriges.

luckly i dont get the rush hour train in the morning, but i'd imagine it'll be nice to be able to move a bit, or possably sit down, with the extra carriges.

and who's gonna pay for this if it goes through, who do you think...

greedy fcukers.

zAbbo

therecklessone wrote:

Then its a seriously flawed arguement.

They don't greet the passengers one by one as they board. They don't have to deal with the passenegers at all. They get on board and press the go button (ok, grossly simplified...) 1 passeneger or 100, their job is the same.

Yeah i agree, more passengers would result in longer delays in breakdowns etc., and something similar with safety situations is what i heard the spokesman bleeting on the radio about.

CCOVICH

rondjon wrote:

If I was doing a job that meant my company became more efficient by 33% in one fell swoop, and was therefore likely to increase revenue by that 33%, then I'd definitely want a cut of that extra revenue. Wouldn't you?

Cop on. Do you use the DART? 2 extra carriages won't make the DART any more efficient (see definition of efficient ), it might make it slightly more comfortable for passengers (like myself) during rush hour, it's not going to result in trains being more punctual, or carrying any more passengers. It's not like there are more stations or anything. Do you think that there are thousands of commuters using the bus or their cars that are suddenly going to start using the DART now that there are two extra carriages in use? Not likely.

You're campaigning to boycott the pubs cos our government won't take on the vintners, or stop raising indirect taxes on drink. Yet you are defending the DART drivers demand for €20k for nothing? Where do you think the money is going to some from to pay these leeches? I'll tell you where

(a) the taxes we all pay
(b) the annual ticket increase in January that commuters pay

The cost of upgrading the network to handle 8 carriage trains-I have no problem paying for that. But the DART drivers pay increase (on a salary of €48k). NO ****ING WAY. What are they doing differently/better than before? As the poster above says, do they offer to take a pay cut when they are 'driving' the DART at off peak times? Yeah right. As the guy on The Last Word said to Willie Noone last night, "Are they actually going to pull these extra two carriages themselves?"

If you're worried about the Ts and Cs of their employment, see the thread over in Commuting/Transport, this is covered under some agreement between IE and the drivers from 2000.

And if you want to argue the case about the DART generating more revenue/profits, then you'll have to wait until there's evidence available to support this assertion. Cos right now, there are no 8 carriage DARTs, and like I said above, even if there were, I doubt that passenger volumes will incease solely due to two extra carriages on existing services.

I've already said that I would be more than willing to operate a DART for €48k a year. **** it, I would be willing to operate 12/24/36 carriage DARTs for that kinda money.

pauln

What I find totally ridiculous is that they are basing their claim on the so called "increased responsibility" the extra carraiges would bring.
Be it one carriage or one hundred carriages as a passenger I would like to think that the same level of care taken for either was the same, in my book the responsibility is the same.

It's simply grabbing for more money at the first chance by the unions and I hope the company hold strong and don't give in.

therecklessone

Folks, there's a thread on the Commuting/Transport forum dealing with this specific issue, and another on the Politics board dealing with this and the wider issue of union activities and industrial action. Might be worth going there for further discussion.

magpie

Discussion on Unions